Metaphysical Systems

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Metaphysical Systems Table of Contents Volume I - The Distant Past On ‘being’: Cartesianism - Passive Observation Introduction: Metaphysical system number three #1: The Error of Zeno Resolving the problem of Abstraction #2: The Error of Aristotle Resolving the problem of Cartesianism #3: The Error of Boethius Resolving the problem of Free Will #4: The Error of Copernicus Resolving the problem of Centricism $5: The Error of Leibniz Resolving the problem of Theodicy #6: The Error of Kant Resolving the problem of Universal Ethics Volume II - The Recent Past On ‘being’ being: Non-Cartesianism - Active Observation Preface to Volume II #7: The Error of Hegel Resolving the problem of non-Cartesianism $8: The Error of Einstein Resolving the problem of ‘i’ #9: The Error of Russell Resolving the problem of Non-Members #10: The Error of Heidegger Resolving the problem of The Void of a Void #11: The Error of Philosophy Resolving the problem of Either/Or #12: The Error of ‘being’ being Resolving the problem of Nihilism Volume III - The Future On ‘being’ being ‘Being’: Cartesianism ‘within’ Non-Cartesianism: Active Observation within Passive Observation Preface to Volume III #13: Metaphysical System 28 Introducing the problem of Metaphysical Systems 7 & 9 #14: Principle Three Introducing the problem of Principles One and Two #15: Ockham’s Razor Introducing the problem of Reductionism #16: Wrong Again Introducing the problem of Being Right #17: The Beginning Introducing the problem of The End #18: Why Now? Introducing the problem of History’s Vector Conclusion: The Peer Review Table of Contents - Expanded Volume I: 500 BC – 1804 AD The Distant Past On ‘being’: Cartesianism - Passive Observation Introduction: Tractate 1: 500 BC (check dates with Tractates) The Error of Zeno: Resolving the problem of Abstraction Part I: The Paradox of seamlessness and multiplicity / Introduction / Zeno’s paradoxes / The scholarly confusion regarding Zeon’s Paradoxes / Zeno’s paradox of space/distance Part II: Resolving the issue with a new metaphysical perception / Zeno: The appearance of the ‘real’ and the ‘real illusion’ / A ‘New Metaphysical Perception’ regarding Zeno’s paradox: / Reversing perceptions – counter view / The point – individuality / The ‘real’ and the ‘real illusion’ illustrated / Working backward to Zeno / Zeno’s Paradox of Motion revisited / The Greek concept of increments / Calculus is but a tool – it does not eliminate what is / Incrementalism and the Individual / Concrete/Physical Functionality / Removing the physical while leaving the abstract intact / The truth ‘I exist.’ vs. the truth ‘You exist.’ / Abstract Functionality / Being a Part of ‘Being’ is not a new idea / Zeno Himself Says It / The multiplicity of individuality Tractate 2: 322 BC The Error of Aristotle: Resolving the problem of Cartesian Systems Part I: The Paradox of Cartesian Systems and non-Cartesian Systems / Introduction / Incremental concentric circles / The intricacies of concentric circles / Confinement is confinement / The concept of Cartesian / Cartesian Systems / The paradox of Cartesian Systems Part II: Resolving the issue with a new metaphysical perception / Introduction /Relativistic 1st Principles /The dance of the angels / The ‘Land of Limited Abstracts: Infinite Finites’ / The ‘Land of Unlimited Abstracts: Finite Infinities’ / Understanding how ‘a’ ‘whole’ can be greater than the sum of its parts / The equality of ’relativistic 1st principle’ / Resolving the paradox of ‘a’ Cartesian System composed of Infinite Finites / Reopening the walls of confinement / What it all means to humanity/all forms of virgin consciousness universally Tractate 3: 525 AD The Error of Boethius: Resolving the problem of Free Will Part I: The Paradox of free will and divine foreknowledge / Introduction / A misconception of determinism / Three forms of action / Limits placed upon Boethius / Some thoughts expounded by Boethius / Boethius’ metaphysical system / Boethius’ metaphysical system and social acceptance / Boethius’ metaphysical system and perpetual historical acceptance / Boethius’ metaphysical system and why it is we have not presently discarded such a system Part II: Resolving the issue with a new metaphysical perception / ‘The wall’ of perception / Rationalizing the irrational / The limits of language / Oil and Water / The four forms of action / What ‘will be’: Free will - A location for ‘being’ – individuality / What ‘has been’: Divine foreknowledge - A location for ‘Being’ – the whole / What ‘is being’: Determinism - A location for being – action, process/reality – the universe / What ‘is’:Pre-destination/predestination - A location for being – existence of existence / Functionality of action / Locations for actions / Divine foreknowledge, predestination, pre-destination, and determinism versus free will / Internationality: the need ‘for’ a location of determinism / Potentiality: the need ‘for’ a location of free will / Nothing: the need ‘for’ a location of nothing / The Book of Divine Foreknowledge/ The Location of Free Will / The Location of Determinism / The misnomer of ‘free will’ / Letting go Tractate 4: 1543 AD The Error of Copernicus: Resolving the problem of Centricism Part I: Part I: The Paradox of Centricism and non-Centricism / Introduction I / Introduction II / Pre- Copernican / Post-Copernican / Copernicus’ paradoxes Part II: Resolving the paradox with a new metaphysical perception / Centricism / A location of Centricism / A location of non-Centricism / The dynamics of Centricism / Stepping ‘out’: into Centricism: Independence / Stepping ‘in’: ‘beyond’ Centricism: Independence / The dynamics of non Centricism / The law of inverse proportionality / The ‘location’ of ‘nothingness’ / Virgin physicality/’virgin physical life’ / Virgin consciousness/’virgin abstract knowing’ / Stepping ‘in’ beyond Centricism: Dependency / Stepping ‘into’ Centricism: Independence / The significance of insignificance: Random Sequencing / The explosive nature of the potentiality of knowing / Removing a piece of Randomness / Boethius’ metaphysical system and why we can now file it away as a part of the annals of history / Archimedean Points / Philosophical infinities / A bag of marbles is not dependent upon sequential time / A unit of knowing is not a marble Tractate 5: 1716 AD The Error of Leibniz: Resolving the problem of Theodicy Part I: The Paradox of omni benevolence / Introduction / Errors created through the passive process of definition / ‘Defining’ theodicy / First / Second / Third / Error through the active process of extrapolation as opposed to the passive process of definition Part II: Resolving the issue with a new metaphysical perception / The Core: Omniscience / The first shell: Omnipotence and Omnipresence / Leibniz and the error of addition / The Second Shell: Answers to three questions / The location of ‘imperfection’ / The Location of ‘perfection’ / Conclusion Tractate 6: 1804 AD The Error of Kant: Resolving the problem of Universal Ethics Part I: The Paradox of the ‘unknowable’ / Introduction / Cartesian / So, do we need a ‘system’? / ‘The’ Missing Foundation / Boredom and knowledge / ‘Everything’ / Passive observing / Active observing / Raising metaphysics up from the dead Part II: Resolving the issue with a new metaphysical perception / Metaphysics and Cartesianism revisited / ‘a’ Foundation / The need for ‘a’ whole / The whole does not change / A new meaning of the term ‘everything’ / How something, which is unchangeable, can change and remain unchangeable / The death of God / Analytic versus Synthetic ‘a priori’ / The causal / The non-causal / The boundary separating the causal and the non-causal / The ‘Absolute Zero’ point of abstraction / The fusion of: 0 / ∞ and ∞ / 0 / God does not change / The future does not exist / The past does not exist / What is exists / Resolving Kant’s four antinomies / The prioritized natural emergence of the first two categorical imperatives / Morality versus categorical imperatives Volume II: 1831 – 1998 The Recent Past On ‘being’ being: Non-Cartesianism - Active Observation Introduction: There is a little philosopher in all of us. Tractate 7: 1831 AD The Error of Hegel: Resolving the problem of Non-Cartesian Systems Part I: The Paradox of the death of ‘knowing’ / Introduction / The land without the concepts ‘before’ and ‘after’ / Non-Cartesainism / The lack of a Foundation / The need for ‘a’ whole remains / The whole/ first cause becomes a redundancy / The idea leads to the concept that ‘first cause’ is not necessary but the whole is necessary / The whole versus the sub-element/the individual / Hegel: Metaphysics is dead / Nietzsche: God is dead / The death of God leads to the death of Metaphysics / God: Nietzsche is dead and for that matter Hegel is also dead. Part II: Resolving the issue with a new metaphysical perception / Introduction / Thesis, antithesis, synthesis / Hegel, Nietzsche and God are all wrong / You are that of which you are a part / The whole does change / What happens to potentiality? / What happens to nothingness? / Expanding knowing / Conclusion Tractate 8: 1955 AD The Error of Einstein – Resolving the problem of Physical Time Part I: The paradox of ‘i’ / Introduction / Dimensions / Goodbye concrete, Hello abstract / Real Numbers / The Tunnel of Abstraction / Imaginary Numbers / The Constancy of time verses the Variability of time: / Part II: Resolving the issue with a new metaphysical perception / Part IIa: The Newtonian ‘i’ - Velocity Equals Distance Divided by Time / Introduction: / Expanding knowing revisited / The
Recommended publications
  • One Hundred Years of Thomism Aeterni Patris and Afterwards a Symposium
    One Hundred Years of Thomism Aeterni Patris and Afterwards A Symposium Edited By Victor B. Brezik, C.S.B, CENTER FOR THOMISTIC STUDIES University of St. Thomas Houston, Texas 77006 ~ NIHIL OBSTAT: ReverendJamesK. Contents Farge, C.S.B. Censor Deputatus INTRODUCTION . 1 IMPRIMATUR: LOOKING AT THE PAST . 5 Most Reverend John L. Morkovsky, S.T.D. A Remembrance Of Pope Leo XIII: The Encyclical Aeterni Patris, Leonard E. Boyle,O.P. 7 Bishop of Galveston-Houston Commentary, James A. Weisheipl, O.P. ..23 January 6, 1981 The Legacy Of Etienne Gilson, Armand A. Maurer,C.S.B . .28 The Legacy Of Jacques Maritain, Christian Philosopher, First Printing: April 1981 Donald A. Gallagher. .45 LOOKING AT THE PRESENT. .61 Copyright©1981 by The Center For Thomistic Studies Reflections On Christian Philosophy, All rights reserved. No part of this book may be used or Ralph McInerny . .63 reproduced in any manner whatsoever without written Thomism And Today's Crisis In Moral Values, Michael permission, except in the case of brief quotations embodied in Bertram Crowe . .74 critical articles and reviews. For information, write to The Transcendental Thomism, A Critical Assessment, Center For Thomistic Studies, 3812 Montrose Boulevard, Robert J. Henle, S.J. 90 Houston, Texas 77006. LOOKING AT THE FUTURE. .117 Library of Congress catalog card number: 80-70377 Can St. Thomas Speak To The Modem World?, Leo Sweeney, S.J. .119 The Future Of Thomistic Metaphysics, ISBN 0-9605456-0-3 Joseph Owens, C.Ss.R. .142 EPILOGUE. .163 The New Center And The Intellectualism Of St. Thomas, Printed in the United States of America Vernon J.
    [Show full text]
  • Saint Bonaventure
    Saint Bonaventure and the Entrance of God Falque Into Theology Saint Bonaventure Saint Bonaventure by Emmanuel Falque and Saint Bonaventure and the Entrance of God Into Theology Into God of Entrance the and Bonaventure Saint translated from French by Brain Lapsa and Sarah Horton The Entrance of God Revised by William C. Hackett Into Theology Properly original, the new version of this essay intends both to nourish debate and differentiate points of view. In its new articulation, the book justifies work that has been carried out since. It justifies the sense of Franciscan rootedness that has never been denied and at the same time opens to the discovery of another reading of the Dominican Thomas Aquinas. The preface specially composed for this American edition, the opening debate with famous medievalist Etienne Gilson, and above all the afterword entitled “Saint Thomas Aquinas and the entrance of God into Philosophy” make it a radically new book. Emmanuel Falque, Professor and honorary dean of philosophy at the Institut Catholique de Paris (ICP), is a philosopher of religion whose research and writing focuses on patristic and medieval philosophy, phenomenology and philosophy of religion. A graduate of the University of Paris IV (Sorbonne), he received his license in Catholic theology summa cum laude from the Centre Sèvres, a university level Jesuit institution in Paris, in 1993, then returned to the Sorbonne to study with Jean-Luc Marion and earned a Ph.D. in philosophy summa cum laude in 1998 and the title of full Professor in 2006. He erved as the 2015 Tipton Visiting Professor in Catholic Studies at the University of California, Santa Barbara and held the Gadamer Visiting Professorship Chair in 2016 (Boston College).
    [Show full text]
  • Malebranche's Augustinianism and the Mind's Perfection
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations Spring 2010 Malebranche's Augustinianism and the Mind's Perfection Jason Skirry University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations Part of the History of Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation Skirry, Jason, "Malebranche's Augustinianism and the Mind's Perfection" (2010). Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations. 179. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/179 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/179 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Malebranche's Augustinianism and the Mind's Perfection Abstract This dissertation presents a unified interpretation of Malebranche’s philosophical system that is based on his Augustinian theory of the mind’s perfection, which consists in maximizing the mind’s ability to successfully access, comprehend, and follow God’s Order through practices that purify and cognitively enhance the mind’s attention. I argue that the mind’s perfection figures centrally in Malebranche’s philosophy and is the main hub that connects and reconciles the three fundamental principles of his system, namely, his occasionalism, divine illumination, and freedom. To demonstrate this, I first present, in chapter one, Malebranche’s philosophy within the historical and intellectual context of his membership in the French Oratory, arguing that the Oratory’s particular brand of Augustinianism, initiated by Cardinal Bérulle and propagated by Oratorians such as Andre Martin, is at the core of his philosophy and informs his theory of perfection. Next, in chapter two, I explicate Augustine’s own theory of perfection in order to provide an outline, and a basis of comparison, for Malebranche’s own theory of perfection.
    [Show full text]
  • Farewell to Descartes
    Out of Revolution AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF WESTERN MAN De Te Fabula Narratur Eugen Rosenstock-Huessy 1938 NEW YORK WILLIAM MORROW AND COMPANY CHAPTER EIGHTEEN Farewell to Descartes THE YEAR OF HARVARD’S TERCENTENARY, 1936- 1937, WAS ALSO the tercentenary of a great intellectual event. Three hundred years ago the rational foundations of modern science were established. It was then that the “ W eltanschauung” which lies at the root of our modern universities was first put into a book. Its author had intended to write some comprehensive volumes under the proud title, L e M o n d e . But that philosopher, René Descartes, was dissuaded by religious dangers from publishing them in full, and limited his task to the famous Discours de la M é t h o d e . In it the great idealistic postulate of the “ C o g i t o e r g o s u m ” was formulated, and therewith the programme of man’s scientific conquest of nature. Descartes’ “Cogito ergo s u m ” opened the way to three hundred years of incredible sci­ entific progress. When Descartes came forward with his “wondrous strange” Discourse, the scholastic type of university had long since been in decay. He replaced the principles by which mediæval thought had been guided ever since Anselm’s “ Credo ut intel- lig a m , ” with his “ Cogito ergo sum.” Among the possible start­ ing points for our powers of reason, scholasticism had singled out man’s faith in the revealing power of God: Descartes sec­ onded it with his no less paradoxical faith in the rational char­ acter of existence and nature.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-86613-2 - Pierre Gassendi and the Birth of Early Modern Philosophy Antonia Lolordo Excerpt More information Introduction This book is bothaninterpretation of Gassendi’s central metaphysical, epistemological, and natural philosophical views and an advertisement for their philosophical and historical interest. Historians of seventeenth- century philosophy can usually tell you that Gassendi was an atomist, an empiricist,oramitigated skeptic, as well as an opponent of Aristotle and Descartes. They might add that he attempted to revive Epicureanism. However, few are likely to have any clear conception ofthe theses Gassendi articulates, the argumentsheoffers in their defense, or the systematic connections between them. This is an unfortunatesituation, and I aim to remedy it. There are at leasttwo reasons why those of us who are interested in early modern philosophy and natural philosophy need to know more about Gassendi. The first is widely recognized. Gassendi’s influence and the importance he was accorded by his peers and close contemporaries is unquestionable. Gassendi was a central figure in seventeenth-century philosophy and, as such, very importantfor the development of mod- ern philosophical thought. He knew and was known by such figures as Descartes and Hobbes and is importantfor understanding Leibniz, Locke, and Newton. Were one a seventeenth-century intellectual who found Cartesianism unacceptable, Gassendi’s philosophy was the obvi- ous alternative. Less well known, however, is the philosophical interest
    [Show full text]
  • The Concept of Heresy and the Debates on Descartes's Philosophy
    Church History Church History and and Religious Culture 100 (2020) 172–186 Religious Culture brill.com/chrc The Concept of Heresy and the Debates on Descartes’s Philosophy Aza Goudriaan Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands and ETF Leuven, Leuven, Belgium [email protected] Abstract This article explores connotations of ‘heresy’ in theological traditions before and dur- ing Descartes’s life. Lutheran and Reformed Protestants, themselves considered heretics by the Church of Rome, adopted the patristic heresiology while designat- ing sixteenth-century antitrinitarian and Anabaptist teachings as heresies. Francisco Suárez and Gisbertus Voetius knew the late medieval conceptuality (e.g., Council of Konstanz, 1418). Voetius possibly thought of Descartes when describing certain philo- sophical views as “smacking of heresy.” This was not, however, an outright charge of heresy. In fact, Descartes’s readiness to be corrected contradicted the traditional hereti- cal quality of “stubbornness.” Plempius’s expression “Cartesian heresy” seems to have been rare. For anti-Cartesians, the rich vocabulary of error made the complex term ‘heresy’ easily avoidable. Keywords heresy – René Descartes – confessions of faith – Francisco Suárez – Gisbertus Voetius – Vopiscus Fortunatus Plempius – Jacques Bénigne Bossuet 1 Introduction In modern historiography,the concept of heresy is occasionally being used with regard to representatives of the new philosophies of the early modern period. Steven Nadler, for example, published a study of Spinoza’s Heresy: Immortality and the Jewish Mind and, more recently, together with Ben Nadler he wrote a © aza goudriaan, 2020 | doi:10.1163/18712428-10002001 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC BY-NCDownloaded4.0 license.
    [Show full text]
  • RENÉ DESCARTES (1596-1650) Author: (W.W.; X.) = William Wallace (1844-1897) Encyclopedia Britannica (New York 1911) Vol
    RENÉ DESCARTES (1596-1650) Author: (W.W.; X.) = William Wallace (1844-1897) Encyclopedia Britannica (New York 1911) vol. 8: 79-90. Electronic Text edited, modernized & paginated by Dr Robert A. Hatch© DESCARTES, RENÉ (1596-1650), French philosopher, was born at La Haye, in Touraine, midway between Tours and Poitiers, on the 31st of March 1596, and died at Stockholm on the 11th of February 1650. The house where he was born is still shown, and a métairie about 3 miles off retains the name of Les Cartes. His family on both sides was of Poitevin descent. Joachim Descartes, his father, having purchased a commission as counsellor in the parlement of Rennes, introduced the family into that demi-noblesse of the robe which, between the bourgeoisie and the high nobility, maintained a lofty rank in French society. He had three children, a son who afterwards succeeded to his father in the parlement, a daughter who married a M. du Crevis, and René, after whose birth the mother died. Descartes, known as Du Perron, from a small estate destined for his inheritance, soon showed an inquisitive mind. From 1604 to 1612 he studied at the school of La Flèche, which Henry IV. had lately founded and endowed for the Jesuits. He enjoyed exceptional privileges; his feeble health excused him from the morning duties, and thus early he acquired the habit of reflection in bed, which clung to him throughout life. Even then he had begun to distrust the authority of tradition and his teachers. Two years before he left school he was selected as one of the twenty-four who went forth to receive the heart of Henry IV.
    [Show full text]
  • Indices Systema Tic Index
    PART THREE INDICES SYSTEMA TIC INDEX Selected headings from the Analytical Index, conveniently grouped. The most comprehensive headings are italicized. BASIC & COMPREHENSIVE ENTRIES bibliography, reference, research tools image of Descartes in scholarship & popular biography of Descartes mind Cartesian era influence of Descartes Descartes' role in science interpretations Descartes' role in Western philosophy personality & character of Descartes development of Descartes' work & thought philosophy of Descartes (general, chief ( chronology) orientation) general literature not cited in Part I (books, protophilosophy (axioms, presuppositions) chapters, articles, lectures) of Descartes seventeenth century GEOGRAPHIC INDEX Albania Bacon Argentina Cambridge Platonists Belgium Crashaw Cartesianism Cudworth Jansen Derham Louvain Digby Brazil Glanvill Bulgaria Harvey China: s. v. Chinese & Cartesian Hobbes Czechslovakia Huxley, T. H. Bohemia Locke Komensky Mill, J. S. Prague Newton White Mountain, battle Norris Denmark Priestley Brahe, Tycho Reid Kierkegaard Shakespeare England Whitehead Cartesianism France literature Cartesianism 421 literature Goethe French language Giinther, Anton Anjou Hegel Arnauld, Ie Grand Heidegger Baillet Husser! Bayle Jaspers Berulle Kant Bretagne Leibniz Caen Marburg School Chanet Marx Chanut Schelling Charron Schopenhauer Chatellerault Greece Clerselier Aristotle Comte Carneades Corneille Damodos Cournot Democritus Cousin Epictetus Daniel, Gabriel Epicureanism Diderot Euclid Fenelon Plato Fermat Plotinus Fontenelle Protagoras
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Preprint. Forthcoming in in Reshaping Natural Philosophy: Tradition and Innovation in the Academic Milieu, Edited by Andrea Sa
    1 Postprint. Please cite published version in History of Universities 30/2 (2020):57-84. Domesticating Descartes, Renovating Scholasticism: Johann Clauberg And The German Reception Of Cartesianism Nabeel Hamid Abstract This article studies the academic context in which Cartesianism was absorbed in Germany in the mid-seventeenth century. It focuses on the role of Johann Clauberg (1622-1665), first rector of the new University of Duisburg, in adjusting scholastic tradition to accommodate Descartes’ philosophy, thereby making the latter suitable for teaching in universities. It highlights contextual motivations behind Clauberg’s synthesis of Cartesianism with the existing framework such as a pedagogical interest in Descartes as offering a simpler method, and a systematic concern to disentangle philosophy from theological disputes. These motivations are brought into view by situating Clauberg in the closely-linked contexts of Protestant educational reforms in the seventeenth century, and debates around the proper relation between philosophy and theology. In this background, it argues that Clauberg nevertheless retains an Aristotelian conception of ontology for purely philosophical reasons, specifically, to give objective foundations to Descartes’s metaphysics of substance. In conclusion, Clauberg should not be assimilated either to Aristotelianism or to Cartesianism or, indeed, to syncretic labels such as ‘Cartesian Scholastic’. Instead, he should be read as transforming both schools by drawing on a variety of elements in order to address issues local to the academic milieu of his time. Keywords: Johann Clauberg; Cartesian Scholastic; German Cartesianism; Protestant Scholasticism; Early Modern Aristotelianism; University of Duisburg; Ontology; German Reformed Education. 1. Descartes In Germany A century and a half ago, Francisque Bouillier observed that ‘Cartesianism did not have as great an influence in Germany as in Holland or France.’1 Descartes’s appearance in Germany faced unique circumstances.
    [Show full text]
  • The Nominalism in Montaigne's Essays
    Marcelo Fonseca de Oliveira THE NOMINALISM IN MONTAIGNE’S ESSAYS O NOMINALISMO NOS ENSAIOS DE MONTAIGNE Marcelo Fonseca de Oliveira1 ABSTRACT This paper faces the hard and almost unexplored issue on Montaigne’s nominalism. It also contains interesting clues about the skepticism in the Middle Ages. It shows the most important extracts of the Essays that would be written under the nominalism’s influence. Most of the scholars even ruminate on that Montaigne translated a Middle Ages’ work. This road certainly leads us to the very few explored issue about the relationships between the Essays and the later Scholastic. Working with an edition of Montaigne’s translation (1581) of Sebond’s Theologia, this paper presents extracts from Sebond’s nominalism that were on the root of some extracts of the Essays. KEY-WORDS: Montaigne. Nominalism. Universals. Sebonde. Fideism. RESUMO Este artigo mapeia a quase inexplorada via do nominalismo nos Ensaios. A questão correlata do ceticismo na Idade Média é também contemplada, de modo indireto. Salvo o trabalho de Compagnon (1980), poucos são os estudos que interpretam os Ensaios a partir da tradição Nominalista (William de Ockham, 1285?-1349). A maior parte dos pesquisadores não considera o fato de que Montaigne fora tradutor de uma obra da escolástica tardia. Este artigo apresenta trecho de uma edição da tradução (1581) da obra do catalão Raymond Sebond que mostra claramente a influência nominalista. Assim, esta influência, nos Ensaios, ocorrera por meio de Sebond. Portanto, não parece ser o caso de um contato direto de Montaigne com as obras de Ockham. Se o problema dos Universais aparece sob roupagem retorica nos Ensaios, seu contato com o Nominalismo ocorreu sobretudo mediante fontes indiretas (Sanches é outra fonte muito provável).
    [Show full text]
  • Cartesianism and Reformed Scholastic Theology: A
    CARTESIANISM AND REFORMED SCHOLASTIC THEOLOGY: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE CONTROVERSY BETWEEN CHRISTOPH WITTICH AND PETRUS VAN MASTRICHT by Jan Adriaan Schlebusch Dissertation submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Magister Artium (Philosophy) in THE DEPARTMENT OF PHILOSOPHY FACULTY OF HUMANITIES UNIVERSITY OF THE FREE STATE BLOEMFONTEIN SOUTH AFRICA JULY 2013 Supervisor: Dr. J.H. Rossouw Internal Co-supervisor: Prof. J.C. Zietsman External Co-Supervisor: Prof. A. Goudriaan i DEDICATION Regi autem saeculorum inmortali invisibili soli Deo honor et gloria in saecula saeculorum amen. Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honour and glory forever and ever. Amen. ii DECLARATION I declare that the thesis hereby handed in for the qualification M.A. (Philosophy) at the University of the Free State, is my own independent work and that I have not previously submitted the same work for a qualification at another University/faculty. ___________________ ____________ Jan Adriaan Schlebusch I hereby declare that I concede copyright of the thesis to the University of the Free State. ___________________ ______________ Jan Adriaan Schlebusch iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express sincere appreciation to the following people whose contributions in various ways were indispensible to the completion of the study: Professor Christoff Zietsman, who has been so much more than merely a supervisor. Thank you for not sparing any effort to assist and accommodate me when obstacles threatened the completion of this study. Doctor Johann Rossouw, whose enthusiasm and interest motivated me when it mattered most. Thank you for your most valuable guidance. Professor Aza Goudriaan, whose guidance and wealth of knowledge were invaluable.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Law, Thomism - and Professor Neilsen;Note Vernon J
    Notre Dame Law School NDLScholarship Natural Law Forum 1-1-1960 Natural Law, Thomism - and Professor Neilsen;Note Vernon J. Bourke Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/nd_naturallaw_forum Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Bourke, Vernon J., "Natural Law, Thomism - and Professor Neilsen;Note" (1960). Natural Law Forum. Paper 52. http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/nd_naturallaw_forum/52 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by NDLScholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Natural Law Forum by an authorized administrator of NDLScholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. NATURAL LAW, THOMISM - AND PROFESSOR NIELSEN The NATURAL LAw FORUM was founded as a medium for discussion of the validity of legal thinking stemming from the persistent tradition that there are certain rules of justice superior to human customs, the enactments of human legislatures, the chance opinions and possible prejudices of given groups of men. That the name, natural law, has come to be associated with this view is not an unmixed blessing. It is a name that repels many thinkers and it admits of a wide variety of meanings. In any case, the FORUM is open to the expression of expert comment, both for and against the theory of natural law. Pursuant to this policy, several valuable pieces of criticism have been printed. The contributions by Nakhnikianl and Nagel,2 in earlier issues, seem to me to have been outstanding in the philosophical category. In the 1959 issue, there appeared a forceful critique written by Kai Nielsen.3 It is to Nielsen's article that my remarks are directed, not in a spirit of rebuttal but of cooperative discussion.
    [Show full text]